Comments

Welcome to the long-awaited, much-anticipated, all-invested...THE CONDITIONER CHRONICLES
Detailing the Good, the Bad, and the Frizzy (and those rare gems of conditioners that make it all worthwhile…)

TESTING METHOD:
I used the scientific method in testing these conditioners to rule out other variables’ influence. Therefore, I used the same products (all the way down to the same stylers) and same technique every single day to have standardized results so that the conditioner was the only change each day. That way, when my hair was better or worse day to day, I knew the conditioner was the only variable. Some conditioners were tested additional times (on top of the standard test) with changes in technique or usage based on the input of others. For example, several shared that Suave Professionals Humectant Conditioner worked well for them only when a generous amount was left in. Therefore, I tested it with my standardized rinse-it-all-out method and, on another test day, rinsed sparingly to leave a substantial amount in my hair. Observations with special usage conditions are noted in the review specifically. With the Suave Professionals Humectant Conditioner, I added my comments with the varied technique with a notation as to what that change in method was since it yielded different results.

Conditioners with poor or fair ratings were tested for one to two days. If uncontrollable variables gave me reason to doubt my results’ validity (like a rainy day or a particularly humid one), I tested more than the standard number of days to ensure that my observations were valid, especially before giving a less desireable rating. Any conditioners with ratings that are good were tested, on average, between three days and a week. For a conditioner to earn a very good or excellent rating, it had to consistantly perform to that standard for over a week of testing. Many of the conditioners rated as good, especially the ones that are at the top of the good rating, were potentially very good but didn’t perform consistantly well in the multiple, consecutive day testing so they may work better in a conditioner rotation than as a regularly used product.

As for my curl specifications, I have both 2b and 3a curls. My climate is hot and humid in summer and mild and moderate in fall and winter. I am extremely prone to buildup, often exhibiting signs of buildup long before others. Therefore, some conditioners that demonstrated buildup indicators might perform better in rotation with other conditioners. I also sent samples to others in different climates (usually drier ones) to test theories, as well as testing samples on myself when traveling (a plane is a wonderful test of a dry climate).

Obviously, different curlies in different climates with different water mineralization and different degrees of dryness who have different goals for their curls and different curl types will have different results than me. (Whew! I think that covers the bulk of the differences!) Therefore, I can imagine that someone’s HG may be rated as poor and a product one person may hate could be rated very good. I’ve tried to figure in two factors into every rating. (A) I’ve considered my experiences and observations during my trial. (B) I’ve reviewed others’ postings and experiences detailed on the boards. If I could find some trend in who preferred a product that was a love-hate conditioner, I’ve noted my theory in the review. For example, there were a few conditioners that were frequently loved in drier climates but mainly disliked or hated in more humid ones. So, while I’ve tried to be objective and comparative of one conditioner to another and one user’s experiences to another, I’ve had to look for a consensus with which to rate these conditioners, and I hope that I have interpretted the results as objectively as possible. It’s also worth mentioning that quite a few of the poor and fair-rated conditioners didn’t even encourage curl definition/shape for me (and some others I surveyed) which would be a problem for those much curlier than me as well because definition and shape keep the 3b+ curls looking neat rather than like an 1980s perm that’s been “picked” to fluffy, big-hair-ness.

I’ve also considered seasons within these rating levels. If a conditioner performed consistantly excellent in one season, it may obtain an excellent rating with a season preference listed. Therefore, just because a conditioner is rated excellent does not mean it is the right choice for use tomorrow if its season-strength was not tomorrow’s season.

More than anything, I’ve created these Conditioner Chronicles to serve in conditioner selection and suggest some comparison between some better choices (so the best one for each individual may be selected). I expect that some wavies and curlies will have had different results than my observations and theories. All of the conditioners listed have been entered in the CurlProducts Product Reviews Database so that you may enter your reviews there and promote similar or alternate opinions. Please take this opportunity to add your reviews in agreement or disagreement as this can take the Conditioner Chronicles to a whole new level where curl-twins everywhere can determine even more so what conditioners will best meet there needs. Prices, when known, are listed in the Product Reviews Database as well.

Finally, let me thank those generous curlies who donated samples of conditioners or my standardized styling products to make the Conditioner Chronicles possible. I hope these reviews serve you well.

KEY TO RATINGS:Excellent: Results were consistantly well above average in multiple areas and any negatives were subtle enough as to not detract or cancel out the positives. Definitely worth repurchasing in large sizes.

Very Good: Results were consistantly above average in one or more areas and any negatives were subtle enough to avoid cancelling out positives. Would repurchase. Usually, there is some element that detracted it from being an excellent or its positives were very good but not stellar. Several of these were climatically limited to performing well in cooler temps only.

Good: There were positives with these that could not be denied; however, there were negatives that needed to be disclosed. Many of the “good” conditioners did not provide as much moisture as curlies frequently need (except the finest ones) or had nice curls but frizz or no frizz but limited curling. To avoid being in the “very good” conditioners, a conditioner would have to have at least one fault that was significant enough to make me hesistant to reuse, or the positives were weak enough to make the negatives have some pull and nullify the positives. These could be someone’s HG if that fault doesn’t occur for them or isn’t a factor (example: someone trying to enlongate their curls or someone with very fine hair that is not at all dry). Generally, I wouldn’t repurchase these personally, but if I was in a tight spot, I know I could use them short term.

Fair: These had at least one positive trait, but the negatives heavily outweighed that positive(s) without question. Obviously, there may be someone whose HG is one of these formulas because the company continues to sell it. However, I believe these are less likely to be favored. Several cleansing conditioners fell into this category because, as conditioners, they did not deliver enough positive to outweigh the negative. I would not repurchase fair conditioners to use as conditioners.

Poor: These had so much negative (and no positives beyond very subtle ones) that I simply could not recommend anyone try them unless a hair twin has had decent results. Obviously, there may be someone whose HG is one of these formulas because the company continues to sell it. However, I believe these are highly unliky to be favored. Many of them had significant negatives with long lasting buildup or other detrimental characteristics that caused me to rate them with a poor. Poor essentially meant to me that if I was stuck on a desert island and one of those conditioners was the only one available, I’d make my own from stuff on the island before I’d use that conditioner again.
Love-Hate: There were a few conditioners that I couldn’t see a trend (part of the country, water hardness, climate, curl type, etc) to determine who would or wouldn’t like them, but they are either adored or despised. For a conditioner to find its way into this category, it needed many devotees and opponents. My suspicion is these conditioners love-hate extremes are because of a tendancy toward buildup and levels of dryness/damage/porousity, but those are difficult criteria to quantify and measure.

Dry Climates Only: These were a set of products that had some rave reviews from many in drier climates but were horrible for me and many others in more humid climates. Because I do not live in a dry climate, I didn’t feel I could rate these fairly so I categorized them accordingly. Certainly, an individual in a humid climate may like one of these with other factors in play (water hardness, hair dryness, curl type), but the trend I saw suggested dry vs humid climatology being the primary deciding attribute.

ADDITIONAL FACTORS:CG-Safe (*): This means that all of the ingredients are (A) water soluble and (B) passed my water-only conditioner cleansing test. I put every conditioner in a little bottle and tried to remove the conditioner with warm water only. If the conditioner was hard to remove or did not completely rinse away (left a film, etc), I did not rate it with a CG-Safe symbol. If a conditioner gets this rating, it could be conditioner-washed out (with a CG-safe conditioner) or rinsed out and would require no shampoo to remove the conditioner from the hair. This category contains (1) cone-free conditioners, (2) conditioners with water soluble silicones, (3) conditioners lacking other buildup prone ingredients (beeswax, petroleum, mineral oil, etc), and (4) passed the conditioner cleansing test.

Requires Surfactants to Remove (&): This conditioner would require at least occasional use of a shampoo with some type of sulfate or cocobetaine to remove water insoluble ingredients or buildup determined by my conditioner-cleansing test (described under the CG-Safe category). Which surfactant to use (sulfate or not) should be determined by your personal hair’s porousity, buildup tendancies, and the rank of the water insoluble ingredients in the conditioner.

Buildup Risk (#): This conditioner showed significant and undeniable signs of buildup and therefore, not only does it require a sulfate shampoo to remove, if you choose to use this conditioner, I recommend it in rotation only with frequent shampooing with sulfates. This is a subjective interpretation based on my observations and others’ experiences.

Great Detangler (^): provided above average detangling

Curl Boosting (!): increases amount and/or degree of curliness

Good as a Leave-In or in Dry Hair (+): This conditioner was good as a leave-in applied to wet or dry hair.

Recommended for Cooler Temps Only (%): This means that the conditioner did not perform as well in warmer temperatures (over 70-80 degrees F).

Recommended to Fine Wavy/Curl Types (~): This means that this conditioner is lighter weight and its performance and others’ experiences suggested that it would provide desireable results for finer hair. Just because a conditioner doesn't have this symbol doesn't mean that fine wavies/curlies wouldn't like it, but I don't foresee it being a recommended conditioner for others who aren't fine wavies/curlies.

Recommended for 3c-4 Curl Types (@): This means that this conditioners’ performance and others’ experiences suggested it would provide desireable results for 3c and 4a/b curl types. Just because a conditioner doesn't have this symbol doesn't mean that 3c-4a/b curlies wouldn't like it, but I don't foresee it being a recommended conditioner for others who aren't 3c-4a/b curl types.

LaCoupe Shine & Smooth Silky Smoothing Conditioner (& ! %)Primary Positive: curl boosting, volumeous 3-D curls, great clumping
This conditioner smelt like grapefruit and was noticeably thinner than the Color Protect which was surprising with of the higher placement of shea butter. My hair felt smooth and silky (go, marketing dept!…truth in advertising) after rinsing. After applying gel, there was noticeable clumping and piecey definition that easily formed with some squishy sounds that generally mean a good hair day is on its way. In the morning, *WOW*, I had 3-D, chunky, clumpy, volumeous curls everywhere. The Shine & Smooth was a little less volumeous/3-D and a little more piecey-clumpy than the LaCoupe Color Rescue. By the end of the day (after working out or on hot/humid days), I had noticeable surface frizz from the humidity. It also had slightly more moisture compared to the Color Rescue.water, cetearyl alcohol, behentrimonium chloride, glycerin, panthenol, butyrospermum parkii (shea butter), cetyl esters, amodimethicone, trideceth-12, cetrimonium chloride, silk amino acids, hydrolyzed wheat protein, hydrolyzed wheat starch, parfum/fragrance, citric acid, methylparaben, propylparaben.

[buylink=http://www.curlmart.com/Elucence-Moisture-Balancing-Conditioner-p-39.html?utm_source=naturallycurly.com&utm_medium=text-link&utm_content=curltalk-post-text&utm_campaign=elucence-elucence-moisture-balancing-conditioner]Elucence Moisture Balancing Conditioner[/buylink] (* ^ %)Primary Positive: good moisture source, excellent detangler
This conditioner took surprisingly little product to detangle very easily and moisturize my hair thoroughly. In the am, my curls were encouraged nicely, though in warmer temps, I had some noticeable surface frizz. In cooler temps, I used this for months at a time and loved its simple elegance and consistancy. It is worth mentioning that I had to discontinue use because of the squalane in this conditioner flaring my rosacea for those who are rosaceans as well. Squalane is a wonderful moisture source and an excellent ingredient for non-rosaceans though.extracts of ginseng, irish moss, brewer's yeast, gingko, anise and peach in purified water, hexadecanol, stearakonium chloride, cetrimonium bromide, squalane, capric-caprillic triglycerides (coconut fatty acids), panthenol (pro-vitamin b5, usp), biotin (vitamin h, usp), imidazolidinyl urea, methylparaben (usp), fragrance.

Kenra Moisturizing Conditioner (* ^ ! %)Primary Positive: good moisture source, excellent detangler, curl boosting
This conditioner provided just right amount of moisture to increase my curls and make them soft. The fragrance was a light hemp-coconut. My curls were chunky and intertwined. I was amazed how luxurious my curls felt with this and how springy they were. The frizz-fighting was better in cooler temps but wasn’t all that bad in warmer ones.purified water, hexadecanol, stearakonium chloride, cetearyl alcohol (emollient), ceteareth-20, hydrolyzed wheat protein, panthenol, isopropylparaben, benzophenon-4, isobutylparaben, butylparaben, fragrance and color.

Robert Craig Conditioner (* ^)Primary Positive: good moisture source, encouraged curls
CurliLocks told me that this conditioner was concentrated, but I'd heard that before (usually, the company sways the customer of this by convincing marketing). I decided to give CurliLocks the benefit because she is CurliLocks. She was right—this conditioner seemed to actually be concentrated. When I applied it in a small area, it seemed to disappear and since it was so liquidy/fluid rather than thick, I figured I needed more but—and this is key—I kept massaging the same place that I'd just put the conditioner, mainly because I was trying to tell how well it dispursed and detangled, and surprisingly, it seemed to multiply its presence in my hair. It didn’t disperse itself through the length but seemed to create more of itself so I could work it through the thickness and depth in that area. In the rinse cycle, my hair felt very soft and silky. In the am, I had some intense spirals but not normal tubes of ringlet activity but more enlongated and spirally like a spring that was stretched out but still making a perfect spiral. I did have some surface frizz, mainly below the shoulders toward the ends. I didn’t get much volume, even when flipped over my head and rubbed my scalp for a second. The moisture level lasted well, and honestly, the appearance didn't change at all—no increased frizz or curl, no decreased curl or definition, and stayed soft to the touch too.water, cetearyl alcohol, behentrimonium methosulfate, glycerin, panthenol, phytantriol, citrus aurantium dulcis (orange) fruit extract, juniperus communis fruit extract, mentha piperita (peppermint) leaf extract, chamomilla recutita (matricaria) extract, rosmarinus officinalis (rosemary) leaf extract, geranium maculatum extract, salvia officinalis (sage) extract, propylene glycol, hair keratin amino acids, polyquaternium-7, sodium chloride, methylchloroisothiazolinone, methylisothiazolinone, fragrance, red 33, yellow 5.

VERY GOOD:Oyin Honey-Hemp Conditioner (* ^ ~ @ %)Primary Positive: natural-looking curls, good moisture source, good shine, excellent detanglingPrimary Fault: surface frizz
This cond just may get the award for the easiest distribution thru the hair and most effortless detangling. It distributed so effortlessly and, while my hair drank it in, its slip remained so that I used much less conditioner than normal. The fragrance was this amazing orange creamsicle (less citrusy, not strong at all, more sweet with a twinge of citrus) fragrance. In my hand, it felt very lightweight, but my hair felt rich and luxurious. I can't imagine this conditioner weighing down my curls. In the morning, I was amazed by the shine. I also had shiny, soft piecey curls. Through the day, the piecey definition loosened to natural, soft curls though I still had few spirals under the top layer. I had some subtle, fluffy surface frizz in warmer temps that wasn’t there in cooler ones. My hair remained light and soft though the day, not weighed down at all. Oddly, airy-soft and light didn't make it was not as soft as it should be or soft only because it was airy as if it was moisture lacking. It just felt weighless and soft. The best descriptor for my curls was natural because there was next to no curl boosting and very nice shine all day.water, organic aloe vera gel, behentremonium methosulfate (from colza oil), honey, coconut oil, hemp oil, vegetable glycerine, hydrolyzed silk, citrus essences, fragrance, preservative.

Regis Olive Oil Conditioner (* ^ ! %)Primary Positive: chunky curls, good moisture source, excellent detanglingPrimary Fault: spider weby frizz, not good in heat/humidity
It didn't take much of this conditioner to detangle and distribute through my hair. In the am, I had chunky/piecey curls that were 3-D and bouncy and curl boosted galore. I quickly learned this is much better in less humid conditions. In cooler temps, there was some subtle spider weby surface frizz, but in warmer temps, the frizz was more noticeable than the curls and the curls’ shape was inconsistnant in hot/humid weather. The curls did loosen slightly during the day but stayed nice, clumpy, and boosted despite the slight change. This is definitely not a good conditioner for a rainy day or hot/humid but is very, very good in dry, cooler weather.water, olea europaea (olive) leaf extract, cetearyl alcohol, stearalkonium chloride, cetrimonium chloride, olea europaea (olive) fruit oil, olive oil PEG-7 esters, polysorbate 80, propylene glycol, panthenol, hydrolyzed wheat protein, stearamidopropyl dimethylamine, fragrance, methylparaben, propylparaben, diazolidnyl urea, green 5, yellow 5.

[buylink=http://www.curlmart.com/DevaCurl-One-Condition-p-55.html?utm_source=naturallycurly.com&utm_medium=text-link&utm_content=curltalk-post-text&utm_campaign=devacurl-devacurl-one-condition]Devacurl One Condition[/buylink] (& ^ ! ~)Primary Positive: soft piecey definition, good moisture source, excellent detanglingPrimary Fault: surface frizz
This conditioner provided excellent detangling and very good distribution and felt nice in rinse cycle. When I scrunched my hair after applying gel, it didn't clump well and was messy—not a good sign. But in the am, my hair was wavy-curly with loose, soft piecey definition. I also had a good amount of surface frizz. The definition loosened and frizz increased thru the day, though my hair still felt soft through the frizz. The frizz increased in both warm and cool weather similarly and when some conditioner was left in or it all was rinsed out similarly for me.aqueous extracts of: achilea millefolium, chamomilla recutita (matricaria), cymbopogon schoenanthus, humulus lupulus (hops), melissa offcinalis (balm mint), rosmarinus offcinalis (rosemary), cetearyl alcohol, behentrimonium chloride, glycerin, amodimethicone, olive oil, cetrimonium chloride, cetyl esters, propylene glycol, trideceth-12, diazolidinyl urea, methyl paraben, propyl paraben, fragrance

Aquage Healing Conditioner (* ^)Primary Positive: excellent detangling, encouraged curls, piecey definition, good moisture sourcePrimary Fault: surface frizz
This conditioner made suds-ish stuff in my hair like Elucence did and provided very good detangling and distribution. It had so much slip that my hair clip fell out in the shower because my twisted-up hair kept un-twisting from the super-slip. When I scrunched after applying gel, the ends wanted to stay one mass while the roots to mid-length (a few inches from the ends) separated into clumps so I was a little concerned. But in the am, I had nice piecey definition. Overall, my hair was more wavy than curly but a few curls interdispursed. There was some some spider weby frizz, mainly on the back and very front. In warmer temps, later in the day, I had a few, individual ringlets form. However, in warmer temps, I also had more moderate surface frizz, though it never broke up the definition amazingly. This was a good moisture throughout the day.water, behentrimonium methosulphate, cetearyl alchohol, cetyl alcohol, centrimonium chloride, hypnea musciformis (red algae) extract, gelidiela acerosa (algae), sargassum filipendula (brown algae) extract, sorbitol, ascophyllum (kelp) extract, irish moss (red algae) extract, neptune kelp extract, dulse (red algae) extract, wakame (Japanese kelp) extract, ppg-2 myristyl ether propionate, centrimonium bromide, pentaerythrityl tetracaprylate/tetracaprate, acetamide mea, stearyl alcohol, silk amino acids, glycerin, tetrasodium edta, dmdm hydratoin, propylparaben, methylparaben, fragrance

Innersense Color Radiance Daily Conditioner (* ^ %)Primary Positive: good clumping, chunky curls, encouraged, good detanglingPrimary Fault: surface frizz
This conditioner provided detangling was slightly above average. There were brown flecks that felt scrubby in the conditioner—probably the rice hulls (wouldn't use as a leave-in because of these). When I scrunched after applying gel, I saw a lot of promise because clumps were formed effortlessly. In the am, I had really nice, chunky, clumpy curls. The definition was more piecey than natural-soft but not the size of normal piecey definition but chunkier and therefore a bit softer. I didn't have any curl boosting, but my curls were clearly encouraged. I also had no discernable frizz first thing, and even by early afternoon, there was only a smidge of subtle halo frizz. I was pleased that this conditioner was more moisture rich, leaving my hair feeling soft. Because of all of the oils and how my curls acted when I worked out, I would recommend using this in cooler temps than hot/humid. By later in the afternoon, I had some surface frizz where a few groups of individual hairs were starting to move from the clumps (not crimped at all, not spider weby or fluffy either, very generic). The surface frizz increased a little more, not all the way to moderate, still mild.purified water, cetanol, behentrimonium methosulfate, centrimonium chloride, oryza sativa (rice) bran oil, hydrolyzed soy protein, cetyl esters, avena sativa (oat) kernel extract, citrus aurantium dulcis (orange) flower oil, nelumbium speciosum (lotus) flower oil, butylene glycol and helianthus anuus seed extract, aspalathus linearis extract, nelumbium speciosum (lotus) flower extract, butyrospermum parkii (shea butter), echinacea angustifolia extract, vaccinium macrocarpon (cranberry) seed oil, plumeria alba flower extract, cymbopogon schoenanthus extract, agropyron (wheatgrass) extract, rice hulls, glycerin, parfum of natural oils

Umberto Giannini Curl & Twirl Detangling Conditioner (* ! ^)Primary Positive: curl boosting, piecey definition, great detanglingPrimary Fault: surface frizz
This conditioner provided very good detangling. It felt great and thick in my hair, especially after how dry it was from the previous . In the am, I had really impressive ringlets to the roots all around. There was mixture of piecey and clumpy curl definition. While there was some surface frizz (not crimped but not dry or spider weby either), but the frizz wasn’t curl-detracting. It didn’t do all that well on a muggy, humid day (increased spider weby and surface frizz).water, cetearyl alcohol, pvp/dmapa acrylate copolymer, cocamide mea, cetremonium chloride, stearalkonium chloride, glyceryl stearate, peg-100 stearate, hydrolyzed wheat protein/pvp copolymer, fragrance, methylparaben, methyldibromo glutaronitrile, phenoxyethanol, red 33, yellow 10.

Cristophe Color Extending Conditioner (& # ! %)Primary Positive: curl boosting, clump definitionPrimary Fault: surface frizz, c11-15 pareth-9 had buildup risk
This conditioner surprised me because my hair was so curly with thick clumps at the roots that broke down into lots of intertwined curls. There was a good bit of some spider weby frizz first thing. The definition held on all day as did curls. The surface frizz increased quite a lot in summer’s heat and humidity, but it stayed minimal in cooler temps on dry days. The moisture wasn’t heavy or intense, but my hair didn’t feel dry either. This was the only conditioner with c11-15 pareth-9 that wasn’t a frizzy disaster so I would recommend regular sulfate pooing with it (though I got away with using [buylink=http://www.curlmart.com/Jessicurl-Hair-Cleansing-Cream-p-103.html?utm_source=naturallycurly.com&utm_medium=text-link&utm_content=curltalk-post-text&utm_campaign=jessicurl-hair-cleansing-cream]Jessicurl Hair Cleansing Cream[/buylink] or Gentle Lather and sulfate-pooing once a week) to avoid buildup problems. If the curls weren’t so amazingly chunky all day, I wouldn’t give this a very good rating, but for that and its all-day consistancy, it deserves it.water, cetearyl alcohol, behentrimonium methosulfate, polyquaternium-7, polyquaternium-11, stearalkonium chloride, helianthus annuus (sunflower) seed extract (heliogenol), polyquaternium-10, dimethicone, tallowtrimonium chloride, c11-15 pareth-9, lauryldimonium hydroxypropyl hydrolyzed collagen, creatine, ascorbic acid, fragrance, triethanolamine, dimethyl stearamine, butylene glycol, lactic acid, phenoxyethanol, methylparaben, isopropylparaben, isobutylparaben, butylparaben, methylchloroisothiazolinone, methylisothiazolinone, d&c red no. 33, fd&c yellow no. 6

GOOD BUT WOULD REPURCHASE BECAUSE SO INEXPENSIVE:Regis Scented Cherry Almond Moisturizing Conditioner (& ^)Primary Positive: amazing detangling, encouraged curl, piecey definitionPrimary Fault: surface frizz
This conditioner was an *amazing* detangler. Its texture was very thin and liquidy. Ironically, its fragrance smelt nothing like cherry or fruit or almonds or food but instead smelt soapy. In the morning, I had amazing, piecey curls with some curl boosting. Unfortunately, some airy surface frizz formed a halo around the outside layer of my head. My curls were shiny and smooth within each clump. Sadly, I had quite a bit of crimped, muggy frizz, still mainly on the surface, show up later in the day. My curls became sausage curls and corkscrews. I was most surprised that this conditioner faired so well when it was so light and fluid in the hand.deionized water (aqua), cherry bark extract, almond bark extract, rosemary (rosmarinus officinalis) extract, nettle (urtica dioica) extract, glyceryl stearate, cetyl alcohol, diamido fatty quat, stearyl alcohol, cetrimonium bromide, jojoba (buxus chinensis) oil, rice (oryza sativa) bran oil, vitamin E oil, hydrolyzed soy protein, fragrance (parfum), propylene glycol, diazolidinyl urea, methylparaben, propylparaben

Nature's Gate Aloe Vera Moisturizing Conditioner for Normal to Dry Hair (* % !)Primary Positive: curl boosting, volumeousPrimary Fault: some crimped surface frizz, really lousy in heat/humidity
The texture of this conditioner was very liquidy and runny so I had to pour only a little in my hand at a time, apply it to my hair, and then pour a little more in my hand to repeat the process. It detangled decently but wasn’t above average. In the am, I had a mixture of nice, piecey-clumpy curls and skinnier ones, all of them quite volumeous. It was definitely curl boosting too. I also had a noticeable layer of surface frizz (somewhat spider weby, slightly crimped). The frizz increased rapidly to a moderate level of lightly-crimped, spider weby, mainly surface (a little b/w the curls) frizz. While the frizz was surfacy, it didn't inflate my hair to fluffy or poofy and only loosened the curls to soft, thick waves with a haze of spider weby surface frizz. The frizz never reached an intense level on the cool test day, remaining moderate, but in summer, it got quite out of control. In cooler temps, when the frizz seemed more manageable, I applied a little of this conditioner on dry hair to see if it helped the frizz. Unfortunately, it allowed the majority of the crimped frizz to remain. The curls did loosen by later in the day, leaving some crimped frizz amongst mainly soft, wavy hair.water, stearalkonium chloride, cetyl alcohol, aloe barbadensis (aloe vera) leaf juice, hordeum distichon (barley) extract, chamomile recutita (matricaria) extract, panthenol, coffea arabica (coffee) extract, viola tricolor (pansy) extract, tocopherol, hydroxyethylcellulose, retinyl palmitate (vitamin a), ergocalciferol (vitamin d), methylparaben, propylparaben, diazolodinyl urea, butylene glycol, fragrance.

TRESemme Vitamin B12 & Gelatin Anti-Breakage (& % !)Primary Positive: curl boosting, volumeousPrimary Fault: Not enough moisture for amount of protein, spider weby frizz
This conditioner’s detangling was slightly lower than average because when I was finger-combing out the tangles with my hair fully covered with cond, I still felt the need to hold halfway up my hair so my finger-combing wouldn’t pull my hair and hurt. I did have less hair leave my head (shedding and breakage then) which was weird with the subpar detangling so maybe there was something to the Anti-Breakage marketing/positioning. In the am, I had definite curl boosting. With that, I also had some spider weby, wispy frizz where the hairs had separated and rebelled. I did have amazingly volumeous curls all day. I did notice some increased dryness/brittleness, perhaps from too little moisture or too much protein for the level of moisture.
This is the new formula, beginning Sept 2006. The vita E, B-7, B-3, C, and B-5 were the main added ingreds.water (aqua), cetyl alcohol, quaternium-18, stearamidopropyl dimethylamine, cocodimonium hydroxypropyl hydrolyzed wheat protein, tocopheryl acetate, biotin, niacinamide, ascorbic acid, panthenol, cyanocobalamin, gelatin/keratin amino acids/lysine hydroxypropyltrimonium chloride, hydroxyethylcellulose, stearyl alcohol, glyceryl stearate, quaternium-80, steareth-21, dimethicone, disodium peg-12 dimethicone sulfosuccinate, oleamine oxide, glycerin, citric acid, pvp, polysorbate 20, dmdm hydantoin, disodium edta, fragrance (parfum)